Talk:Lili (Tekken)/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: David Fuchs (talk · contribs) 02:00, 27 November 2012 (UTC) Judging against the good article criteria, some forthcoming thoughts... Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 02:00, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
After looking through the article, I've judged that it currently does not meet GA criteria on a number of fronts.
- Criteria 1
- The prose could use a good copyedit. There are issues like run-on sentences spliced together (e.g., In GameZone's review of Dark Resurrection, however, Lili was stated to have stiff moves compared to other Tekken females and that she just feels like a rehash, but is still a decent character., combined with overuse of passive voice, one or two sentence quasi-paragraphs, and redundant, improper wording ("to make matters worse", etc.)
- The character history should be presented in present tense per WP:WAF.
- Criteria 2
- I think some of the references are going to need justification as reliable sources, based on my quick examinations: Neko Magic, Estatic Arts, Hij.com, Tomopop.
- Criteria 3
- The "broadness" of the coverage is I think undermined by the fact that the "character design" section is mostly just a recitation of the character's outfit, as opposed to actual commentary about how the creators envisioned her, initial designs, et al.
- Criteria 6
- File:Lili Tekken Render.png needs a fleshed-out fair use rationale; "to illustrate the article" doesn't meet WP:NFCC requirements.
I suggest looking for more sources, giving the article a copyedit, and beefing up the rationales before submitting again. If you have any further questions, leave a message on my talk page. Thanks, --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 14:01, 30 November 2012 (UTC)